GeForce GTX 1650 vs Iris Plus Graphics 950
GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:
Iris Plus Graphics 950
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce GTX 1650 is significantly newer (2019 vs 0). The GeForce GTX 1650 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Iris Plus Graphics 950 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 1650 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 339.9% higher G3D Mark score and 100+% more VRAM (4 GB vs 0 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Iris Plus Graphics 950.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 | Iris Plus Graphics 950 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+339.9%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-339.9%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | Generation 11.0 (2019−2021) (10nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100+%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce GTX 1650 remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Iris Plus Graphics 950
GeForce GTX 1650
The GeForce GTX 1650 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 23 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1485 MHz to 1665 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,869 points. Launch price was $149.
Iris Plus Graphics 950
The Iris Plus Graphics 950 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in sem dados. It features the Generation 11.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 400 MHz to 1000 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 15W. Manufactured using 10 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,789 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Iris Plus Graphics 950's 1,789 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 339.9%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Iris Plus Graphics 950 uses Generation 11.0, both on 12 nm vs 10 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 512 (Iris Plus Graphics 950). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1.024 TFLOPS (Iris Plus Graphics 950). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1000 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Iris Plus Graphics 950 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869+340% | 1,789 |
| Architecture | Turing | Generation 11.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 10 nm |
| Shading Units | 896+75% | 512 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS+191% | 1.024 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz+67% | 1000 MHz |
| ROPs | 32+300% | 8 |
| TMUs | 56+75% | 32 |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Iris Plus Graphics 950 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 1650 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Iris Plus Graphics 950 has 0 MB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 100+% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs System.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Iris Plus Graphics 950 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | Shared System RAM |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | Shared |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s | System |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | System |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 (12_1) (Iris Plus Graphics 950). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 3.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Iris Plus Graphics 950 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12 (12_1) |
| Vulkan | 1.4+8% | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 3 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs Quick Sync 7 (Iris Plus Graphics 950). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs Quick Sync 7. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,H.265,VP9,VP8,MPEG-2 (Iris Plus Graphics 950).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Iris Plus Graphics 950 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | Quick Sync 7 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | Quick Sync 7 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | H.264,H.265,VP9,VP8,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Iris Plus Graphics 950's 15W — a 133.3% difference. The Iris Plus Graphics 950 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1W (Iris Plus Graphics 950). Power connectors: None vs Integrated. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 85°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Iris Plus Graphics 950 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 15W-80% |
| Recommended PSU | 300W | 1W-100% |
| Power Connector | None | Integrated |
| Length | 229mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-18% | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9 | 119.3+14% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the Iris Plus Graphics 950 launched at $0 and now averages $0. The Iris Plus Graphics 950 costs 100+% less ($75 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs Infinity (Iris Plus Graphics 950) — the Iris Plus Graphics 950 offers Infinity% better value.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Iris Plus Graphics 950 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149 | $0-100% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $75 | $0-100% |
| Performance per Dollar | 104.9 | Infinity |
| Codename | TU117 | Ice Lake GT2 |
| Release | April 23 2019 | sem dados |
| Ranking | #323 | #634 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce GTX 1650 and Iris Plus Graphics 950
